Connect with us

Opinion

ECT: A toss between confrontation and compromise!

Published

on

People placing their signatures on postcards during a protest campaign held by the railway unions on Monday against what they called a move to sell the East Container Terminal of the Colombo Port (Pic by Thushara Atapattu )

 

By I. P.C. MENDIS

States and Governments exist and coexist internationally on the basis of mutual trust, understanding, good-will and cooperation. If any state or government chooses to work outside these norms, it is normally classified as a Banana Republic and generally finds itself isolated with none to care for it. If they choose to be so isolated, they should be confident of going it alone or have clandestine backing of some super-power. North Korea and Cuba for example are virtual dictatorships/authoritarian and their populations perfectly regimented to face any situation. Sri Lanka with its divisive forces and elements bred in democratic traditions, cannot afford to be North Korea or Cuba. Nevertheless, whether one likes it or not, its history is replete with treachery. One need not go so far, but the way some of our politicos behave and the frequency with which they switch political ideologies and affiliations could be ample testimony to prove the point.

 

The EasternTerminal

There is no question that covenants and agreements which we have entered into with other countries have to be scrupulously honoured, if Sri Lanka is not to be considered “a pariah state”. If we vitiate or digress, we lose faith, face and confidence with the entire international community, adversely affecting, inter alia, trade and commerce. This is not to say that the door is shut for any re-negotiation of any provision on expressly good compelling grounds. A complete abrogation of the Eastern Terminal MOU ex parte, as some do agitate, is not only out of the question but out of our reach, without adverse consequences. Perhaps that privilege is exclusive to powers which can boast of nuclear strength. They can even withdraw their contribution to the UN, withdraw from membership of its Agencies, and even compare some of them with cesspools and still trot about unscathed! Sri Lanka is not that fortunate — those who strain their muscles need to realise.

As for the Eastern Terninanal,, what is baffling is that although there were a few whimpers, here and there, it was only a few days ago, after permitting opposing sections to gather momentum and work themselves to a crescendo — that the government through the President, clearly explained fully at Walallawita, the government’s position that it is now carrying the Yahapalana baby, re-negotiated by him with the Indian Prime Minister.

It is indeed most fortunate that the latter did not refuse to budge or choose to ask for a “quid pro quo” as it happened in the case of the Hambantota Port and the Port City, where we had to concede a second 99-year lease and an additional block respectively. Mattala Airport was saved by the skin of its teeth !

President’s Dilemma

Apparently the re-negotiated formula (Jt. Stock Co.) had either been initiated by President Gotabhaya or agreed to mutually at the summit, and it is definitely not within the norms of international decorum and decency to go back and haggle on that issue, however strong the opposition to it is locally..The country’s image is at stake. He would not certainly expect his people here to make him look ridiculous in the eyes of the Big Brother across the Palk Straits, and more-so the international community. .Sri Lanka’s honour and pride are at stake, and his people need to stand by him and strive to understand and compare the re-negotiated formula with the Yahapalana Agreement, as to which is more beneficial or less dangerous. Many of those who shout hoarse now had maintained a stoic silence when the MOU was signed, and hence ought to share the responsibility. The opposition seems to be of a mostly political nature than a patriotic one.

India has unequivocally made its presence felt when it had no second thoughts of invading Sri Lanka through its armed forces, euphemistically called the IPKF,.preceded by the infamous “parippu “drop! President JRJ had his arm twisted into the 13th Amendment, with which we are now stuck – a white elephant- despite India failing to perform its part of the deal.. Former East Pakistan is now Bangladesh, “courtesy” India ! The “sandos” ought to realise. Sri Lanka has by necessity to be tactful and diplomatic without confrontation and bogus rhetoric.

Prime Minister Modi seems a different kettle of fish to Indira and Rajiv Gandhi, and we have to capitalise on his current goodwill. He could mean business if he wants to with the US on his side. In re-negotiating it would be beneficial if we were to point out the trade balance in its favour, and the fact of having already released our oil tank farm in Trincomalee, and a section of the retail oil business, as also the pronounced Indian business interests already here.

 

Compromise Solution

Without disturbing the already mutually agreed arrangement for a Joint Stock Company,some of the fears expressed by the opposing forces here could possibly be allayed, with the proposed company being registered as an unlisted company, with a strict embargo on the sale of any minority shares to any other party other than the Port Authority, the Chairman to be from the majority shareholding,(Port Authority), the Managing Director (CEO) to be nominated by he Investor(s) with the nod from the Board of Directors, the majority on the Board to be from the major shareholding, one of whom should be the nominee of the Minister of Finance. If there are to be more than one shareholder among the minority group, they could form a consortium and provide a written agreement enshrining these and other conditions. ( The President had hinted on the possibility of there being more than one minority shareholder). Such a solution would possibly take the wind off the sails and satisfactorily end the impasse.

 

 



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Opinion

Ministerial resignation and new political culture

Published

on

Kumara Jayakody

The resignation of Energy Minister Kumara Jayakody comes after several weeks of controversy over his ministerial role. The controversy sharpened when the minister was indicted by the Commission on Bribery and Corruption for a transaction he was involved in ten years ago as a government official in the Fertiliser Corporation. The other issue was the government’s purchase of substandard coal from a new supplier. Minister Jayakody’s resignation followed the appointment of a Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry to investigate coal and petroleum purchases. The minister who resigned, along with the Secretary to the Ministry of Energy, Udayanga Hemapala, stated that they did not wish to compromise the integrity of the investigation to be undertaken by the Commission of Inquiry.

The government’s initial resistance to holding the minister accountable for the costly purchase was based on the argument that the official procedure had been followed in ordering the coal. However, the fact that the procedure permitted a disadvantageous purchase which has come to light on this occasion suggests a weakness in the process. The government’s appointment of the Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry to examine purchases as far back as 2009 follows from this observation. In this time 450 purchases are reported to have been made, and if several of them were as disadvantageous as this one, the cost to the country can be imagined. The need to investigate transactions since 2009 also arises from the possibility that loopholes in official government procedures in the past would have permitted private enrichment at a high cost to the country.

Concerns have been expressed in the past that the purchase of coal and petroleum, often on an emergency basis, enabled the use of emergency procurement processes which do not require going through the full tender procedures. The government has pledged to eradicate corruption as its priority. As a result, the general population would expect it to do everything within its power to correct those systems that permitted such corruption. Accountability is not only forward looking to ensure non-corrupt practices in the present, it is also backward looking to ensure that corrupt practices of the past are discontinued. This would be a matter of concern to those who headed government ministries and departments in previous governments. Those who have misapplied the systems can be expected to do their utmost to resist any investigation into the past.

Politically Astute

One of the main reasons for the government’s continuing popularity among the general population, as reflected in February 2026 public opinion poll by Verité Research, has been its willingness to address the problem of corruption. Public opinion studies have consistently shown that corruption remains one of the top concerns of citizens in Sri Lanka. The arrests and indictments of members of former governments have been viewed with general satisfaction as paving the way to a less corrupt society. At the same time, the resignations of Minister Kumara Jayakody and Secretary Udayanga Hemapala are an indication that not even government members will be spared if they are found to have crossed red lines. This is an important signal, as public confidence depends not only on holding political opponents to account but also on demonstrating fairness and consistency within one’s own ranks.

There appears to be a strategy on the part of the opposition to target government leaders and allege corruption so that ministers will be forced to step down. Organised protests against other ministers, and demonstrations outside their homes, are on the rise. The government appears not to want to give in to this opposition strategy and therefore delayed the resignation of Minister Jayakody until it had itself established the Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry. It enabled the minister to step down without it seeming that the government was yielding to opposition pressure. In political terms, this was a calibrated response that sought to balance the need for accountability with the need to maintain authority and coherence in governance.

The demand by opposition parties to focus attention on the coal problem could also be seen as an attempt to shift the national debate from the corruption of the past to controversies in the present. The opposition’s endeavour would be to take the heat off themselves in regard to the corruption of the past and turn it onto the government by making it the focus of inquiries into corruption. The decision to set up a Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry accompanied by the resignation of the minister and the ministry secretary was a politically astute way of demonstrating that the government will have no tolerance for corruption. It will also help to remind the general public about the rampant corruption of past governments which prevents the opposition’s corruption accusations against the government from gaining traction amongst the people.

New Practice

The resignation of a government minister who faces allegations but has not been convicted is still a relatively new practice in Sri Lanka. The general practice in Sri Lanka up to the present time has been for those in government service, if found to be at fault, to be transferred rather than removed from office. This is commonly seen in the case of police officers who, if found to have used excessive force or engaged in abuse, are transferred to another station rather than subjected to more serious disciplinary action. A similar pattern was seen in the case of former minister Keheliya Rambukwella, who faced allegations of corruption in the health field but was reassigned to a different portfolio rather than removed from government.

Against this background, the present resignation assumes greater importance. It signals a willingness to break with past practices and to establish a higher standard of conduct in public office. However, a single instance does not in itself create a lasting change. What is required is the consistent application of the same principle across all cases, irrespective of political affiliation or convenience. This is where the government has an opportunity to strengthen its credibility. By ensuring that the same standards of accountability are applied to its own members as to those of previous governments, it can demonstrate that its commitment to good governance is not selective.

The establishment of the Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry, the willingness to accept ministerial resignation, and the recognition of systemic weaknesses in procurement are all steps in the right direction. The challenge now is to ensure that these steps are followed through with determination and consistency. If the investigations are conducted impartially and lead to meaningful reforms, the present controversy could mark a turning point. The resignation of the minister should not be seen as an isolated event but as the beginning of a new practice. If it becomes part of a broader pattern of accountability, it can contribute to a new political culture and to restoring public trust in government.

by Jehan Perera

Continue Reading

Opinion

Shutting roof top solar panels – a crime

Published

on

The Island newspaper’s lead news item on the 12th of April 2026 was on the CEB request to shut down rooftop solar power during the low demand periods. Their argument is that rooftop solar panels produce about 300 MW power during the day and there is no procedure to balance the grid with such a load.

We as well as a large academic and industrial consortium members have been trying to promote solar energy as a viable and sustainable power source since the early 1990’s. We formed the Solar Energy Society and made representations to Government politicians about the need to have solar power generation. This continuous promotional work contributed to the rapid increase in PV solar companies from three in the early 1990’s to over 650 active PV solar companies established today in the country. These companies have created tens of thousands of high-quality jobs, as well as moving in the right direction for sustainable development.

However, all these efforts appear to have been in vain since the CEB policy makers have continuously rejected solar energy as a viable alternative. Their power generation plans at that time did not include solar energy at all but only relied on imported coal power plants and diesel power generation. Even at the meetings where CEB senior staff were present, we emphasised the importance of installation of battery storage facilities and grid balancing for which they have done nothing at all over the past three decades. Now they have grudgingly accepted the need to include solar energy, which was an election promise of the present government. The government policy is that Sri Lanka should go for renewables to satisfy 70% of its energy needs by 2030 and soon move towards the green hydrogen technology by using solar and wind energy.

The question is why the diesel generators and hydropower stations cannot be shut off one by one to accommodate the solar power generated during the daytime. Unlike a coal-fired plant, diesel generators and hydro power plants can be shut off in a relatively shorter period of time. Norochchalai Lakvijaya power plant produces around 900 MW of power while the total country requirement is 2500 MW on a daily basis. The remainder is provided by diesel generators, hydro and other renewable energy sources.

The need for work to achieve this goal of grid balancing should be the primary responsibility of the CEB. Modern grid balancing systems are in operation in countries such as Germany where around 56% of its energy come from renewable sources. They also plan to increase this to reach 80% of the energy required through renewables by 2030. Our CEB is hell bent on diesel power plants. Who benefits from such emergency power purchases is anybody’s guess?

The Government and the CEB should realise that all roof top solar plants are privately financed through personal funds or bank loans with no financial burden on the Government. It is a crime to request them not to operate these solar panels and get the necessary credits for the power transmitted to the national grid. It appears that the results of CEB’s lack of grid balancing experience and unwillingness to learn over three decades have now passed to the privately-funded rooftop solar panel owners. It is unfortunate that the Government is not considering the contributions of ordinary individuals who provide clean power to the national grid at no cost to the Government. Over 150,000 rooftop solar panels owners are severely affected by these ruthless decisions by the CEB, and this will lead to the un-popularity of this new government in the end.

by Professors Oliver Ileperuma and I M Dharmadasa

Continue Reading

Opinion

Nilanthi Jayasinghe – An Appreciation

Published

on

It was with shock that I realized that the article in the Sunday Island of April 5 about the winsome graduate gazing serenely at her surroundings was, in fact, an obituary about Nilanthi Jayasinghe, a former colleague who I had held in high esteem. I had lost touch with Nilanthi since my retirement and this news that she had passed away, saddened me deeply

I knew and had worked with Nilanthi – Mrs Jayasinghe as we used to call her – at the Open University of Sri Lanka in the 1990s. As Director, Operations, she was a figure that we as heads of academic departments, relied on; a central bastion of the complex structure that underpinned academic activities at Sri Lanka’s major distance education provider. Few people realize what it takes to provide distance education in an environment not geared to this form of teaching/learning – the volume of Information that has to be created, printed and delivered; the variety of timetables that have to be scheduled; the massive amount of continuous assessment assignments and tests that have to be prepared and sent out; the organization of a multitude of face-to face teaching sessions; the complex scheduling of examinations and tests – all this needed to be attended to for a student population of more than 20,000 and for 23 centres of study dotted across Sri Lanka.

It was an unenviable task but Nilanthi Jayasinghe with her flair for organization, handled it all with aplomb and a deep sense of commitment. If there were delays and inconclusive action on our part, she never reprimanded but would work with us to sort things out. Her work as Director, Operations brought her into contact with staff across the spectrum-from the Vice-Chancellor to the apprentice in the Open University’s Printing Press. Nilanthi treated everyone with dignity and as a result, was respected by all at the university. She was sensitive, kind-hearted, a good friend who would readily share problems and help to solve them. The year NIlanthi retired, I was out of the island. When I came back to the Open University, I felt bereft without the steadfast support of her stalwart presence .

The article in the ‘Sunday Island’ describes her life after retirement, looking after family members and enjoying the presence of a granddaughter.

After a lifetime of commitment to others, Nilanthi Jayasinghe truly deserved this happiness.

May she be blessed with peace.

Ryhana Raheem

Professor Emeritus
Open University of Sri Lanka.

Continue Reading

Trending